Inflammatory mechanisms in acute pancreatitis

Acute pancreatitis is an inflammatory condition. It is associated with a systemic inflammatory response, the degree of which appears to correlate with the severity of the illness. The role of circulating leucocytes and their production of cytokines in the development of severe acute pancreatitis is unknown. Monocytes are believed to be a major source of pro-inflammatory cytokines, but lymphocytes and endothelial cells also produce such cytokines. These cell types, in particular lymphocytes, also produce a variety of down-regulatory signals so that monocytes, lymphocytes and endothelial cells interact to produce a net systemic inflammatory signal, influenced further by the varying degree of lymphocyte sub-populations to undergo blastogenesis in response to inflammation. The focus of this thesis is on pro-inflammatory cytokines and their release in vitro from peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) isolated from patients with acute pancreatitis.On admission to hospital, patients with acute pancreatitis demonstrated increased interleukin-6 and interleukin-8 release but not tumour necrosis factor-a release from isolated PBMCs compared with healthy volunteers. The severity of the disease was not related to the level of cytokine release from a standard cell number. However, when allowance was made for the variation in PBMC numbers in the blood, the estimated IL-6 and IL-8 release per unit of blood was greater in those patients with severe disease compared with those with mild disease. Severe disease is also characterised by a more prolonged duration of increased pro-inflammatory cytokine release compared with patients with mild disease. Products of the cyclooxygenase pathway play a down-regulatory role in PBMCs in patients with acute pancreatitis as indomethacin (a cyclo-oxygenase inhibitor) had no significant effect on pro-inflammatory cytokine release by PBMCs isolated from healthy volunteers, but increased IL-6 and IL-8 release by PBMCs isolated from patients with both mild and severe disease. PBMC pro-inflammatory cytokine release remains sensitive to the down-regulatory action of the T-cell regulatory cytokines, interleukin-4 and interleukin-10. Lymphocyte proliferation (as measured by thymidine incorporation) is impaired in acute pancreatitis and correlates with the severity of the disease. Following the successful isolation and culture of human umbilical vein endothelial cells, IL-4 and IL-10 (in contrast to their inhibitory action on PBMCs), produce a dose dependent increase in endothelial cell IL-6 and IL-8 release. TNFa is often undetectable in patients with acute pancreatitis on admission, even in severe disease. However, elevation in the serum concentration of soluble TNFa receptors would suggest significant TNFa-induced inflammation early in the course of the disease. Glutamine is a conditionally essential amino acid in patients with severe acute pancreatitis and is important for immune function. A double blind, randomised controlled trial of glutamine supplemented versus conventional total parenteral nutrition in patients with severe acute pancreatitis demonstrated a trend towards improved lymphocyte proliferation in the glutamine supplemented group. Furthermore, PBMC IL-8 release but not TNFa and IL-6 release was significantly reduced over the study period.Severe acute pancreatitis is associated with prolonged PBMC pro¬ inflammatory cytokine release and impaired lymphocyte proliferation. However, these cells remain sensitive to the down-regulatory action of T-cell cytokines in vitro, but the exogenous administration of these cytokines may have an unpredictable clinical effect because of their different actions on various cell types. More general methods of immuno-modulation, such as the exogenous administration of glutamine may have therapeutic benefit in patients with severe acute pancreatitis

Effect of Hydrocortisone on Mortality and Organ Support in Patients With Severe COVID-19: The REMAP-CAP COVID-19 Corticosteroid Domain Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Evidence regarding corticosteroid use for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is limited. Objective: To determine whether hydrocortisone improves outcome for patients with severe COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: An ongoing adaptive platform trial testing multiple interventions within multiple therapeutic domains, for example, antiviral agents, corticosteroids, or immunoglobulin. Between March 9 and June 17, 2020, 614 adult patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 were enrolled and randomized within at least 1 domain following admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) for respiratory or cardiovascular organ support at 121 sites in 8 countries. Of these, 403 were randomized to open-label interventions within the corticosteroid domain. The domain was halted after results from another trial were released. Follow-up ended August 12, 2020. Interventions: The corticosteroid domain randomized participants to a fixed 7-day course of intravenous hydrocortisone (50 mg or 100 mg every 6 hours) (n = 143), a shock-dependent course (50 mg every 6 hours when shock was clinically evident) (n = 152), or no hydrocortisone (n = 108). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was organ support-free days (days alive and free of ICU-based respiratory or cardiovascular support) within 21 days, where patients who died were assigned -1 day. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model that included all patients enrolled with severe COVID-19, adjusting for age, sex, site, region, time, assignment to interventions within other domains, and domain and intervention eligibility. Superiority was defined as the posterior probability of an odds ratio greater than 1 (threshold for trial conclusion of superiority >99%). Results: After excluding 19 participants who withdrew consent, there were 384 patients (mean age, 60 years; 29% female) randomized to the fixed-dose (n = 137), shock-dependent (n = 146), and no (n = 101) hydrocortisone groups; 379 (99%) completed the study and were included in the analysis. The mean age for the 3 groups ranged between 59.5 and 60.4 years; most patients were male (range, 70.6%-71.5%); mean body mass index ranged between 29.7 and 30.9; and patients receiving mechanical ventilation ranged between 50.0% and 63.5%. For the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively, the median organ support-free days were 0 (IQR, -1 to 15), 0 (IQR, -1 to 13), and 0 (-1 to 11) days (composed of 30%, 26%, and 33% mortality rates and 11.5, 9.5, and 6 median organ support-free days among survivors). The median adjusted odds ratio and bayesian probability of superiority were 1.43 (95% credible interval, 0.91-2.27) and 93% for fixed-dose hydrocortisone, respectively, and were 1.22 (95% credible interval, 0.76-1.94) and 80% for shock-dependent hydrocortisone compared with no hydrocortisone. Serious adverse events were reported in 4 (3%), 5 (3%), and 1 (1%) patients in the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with severe COVID-19, treatment with a 7-day fixed-dose course of hydrocortisone or shock-dependent dosing of hydrocortisone, compared with no hydrocortisone, resulted in 93% and 80% probabilities of superiority with regard to the odds of improvement in organ support-free days within 21 days. However, the trial was stopped early and no treatment strategy met prespecified criteria for statistical superiority, precluding definitive conclusions. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02735707

Diversity and ethics in trauma and acute care surgery teams: results from an international survey

Background Investigating the context of trauma and acute care surgery, the article aims at understanding the factors that can enhance some ethical aspects, namely the importance of patient consent, the perceptiveness of the ethical role of the trauma leader, and the perceived importance of ethics as an educational subject. Methods The article employs an international questionnaire promoted by the World Society of Emergency Surgery. Results Through the analysis of 402 fully filled questionnaires by surgeons from 72 different countries, the three main ethical topics are investigated through the lens of gender, membership of an academic or non-academic institution, an official trauma team, and a diverse group. In general terms, results highlight greater attention paid by surgeons belonging to academic institutions, official trauma teams, and diverse groups. Conclusions Our results underline that some organizational factors (e.g., the fact that the team belongs to a university context or is more diverse) might lead to the development of a higher sensibility on ethical matters. Embracing cultural diversity forces trauma teams to deal with different mindsets. Organizations should, therefore, consider those elements in defining their organizational procedures. Level of evidence Trauma and acute care teams work under tremendous pressure and complex circumstances, with their members needing to make ethical decisions quickly. The international survey allowed to shed light on how team assembly decisions might represent an opportunity to coordinate team member actions and increase performance

Surgeons' perspectives on artificial intelligence to support clinical decision-making in trauma and emergency contexts: results from an international survey

Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) is gaining traction in medicine and surgery. AI-based applications can offer tools to examine high-volume data to inform predictive analytics that supports complex decision-making processes. Time-sensitive trauma and emergency contexts are often challenging. The study aims to investigate trauma and emergency surgeons' knowledge and perception of using AI-based tools in clinical decision-making processes. Methods: An online survey grounded on literature regarding AI-enabled surgical decision-making aids was created by a multidisciplinary committee and endorsed by the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES). The survey was advertised to 917 WSES members through the society's website and Twitter profile. Results: 650 surgeons from 71 countries in five continents participated in the survey. Results depict the presence of technology enthusiasts and skeptics and surgeons' preference toward more classical decision-making aids like clinical guidelines, traditional training, and the support of their multidisciplinary colleagues. A lack of knowledge about several AI-related aspects emerges and is associated with mistrust. Discussion: The trauma and emergency surgical community is divided into those who firmly believe in the potential of AI and those who do not understand or trust AI-enabled surgical decision-making aids. Academic societies and surgical training programs should promote a foundational, working knowledge of clinical AI

Time for a paradigm shift in shared decision-making in trauma and emergency surgery? Results from an international survey

Background Shared decision-making (SDM) between clinicians and patients is one of the pillars of the modern patient-centric philosophy of care. This study aims to explore SDM in the discipline of trauma and emergency surgery, investigating its interpretation as well as the barriers and facilitators for its implementation among surgeons. Methods Grounding on the literature on the topics of the understanding, barriers, and facilitators of SDM in trauma and emergency surgery, a survey was created by a multidisciplinary committee and endorsed by the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES). The survey was sent to all 917 WSES members, advertised through the society’s website, and shared on the society’s Twitter profile. Results A total of 650 trauma and emergency surgeons from 71 countries in five continents participated in the initiative. Less than half of the surgeons understood SDM, and 30% still saw the value in exclusively engaging multidisciplinary provider teams without involving the patient. Several barriers to effectively partnering with the patient in the decision-making process were identified, such as the lack of time and the need to concentrate on making medical teams work smoothly. Discussion Our investigation underlines how only a minority of trauma and emergency surgeons understand SDM, and perhaps, the value of SDM is not fully accepted in trauma and emergency situations. The inclusion of SDM practices in clinical guidelines may represent the most feasible and advocated solutions